The regular meeting of the Utah Transportation Commission was called to order at 9:10 a.m. by Commission Chairman Glen E. Brown. He welcomed all those in attendance, recognized the many local elected officials, and introduced Commission members and UDOT staff.

Approval of MinutesCommissioner Clyde moved to approve the minutes of the Transportation Commission Meeting held in Loa on July 1, 1994. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Larkin and it passed unanimously.

Introduction of New Community Relations Director, Kent HansenDirector Zwick introduced the Department's new Community Relations Director, Kent Hansen, replacing Kim Morris who left the department at the end of June. He explained that the process to find a new Community Relations Director was ongoing for approximately four weeks and involved over 85 applicants in a very rigorous review. The job brings keen interest because of the public awareness and the added responsibilities that are on our transportation system; he must define to the community and tell the story of what we do as a department, so that we might be truthfully represented.

Kent is a native of Ogden, Utah and has spent many years in the broadcasting business. In a distinguished career with the Navy he directed the broadcasting affairs in Japan for a number of years, and has also worked on the West Coast. When he retired from the Navy he returned to Ogden. Director Zwick said we are very honored to have him as part of our staff and warmly welcomed him.

Kent expressed his thanks to Director Zwick. He said he was very happy to be back in Ogden and in Utah and was happy to have the opportunity to give something back for all the things Utah has given him. He looks forward to working with everyone.

Chairman Brown expressed welcome to Kent on behalf of the Commission and said they were pleased to have him as part of the UDOT staff.

Local CommentsChairman Brown said they feel it is important as a Commission to hold meetings in various locations throughout the state in order to get first-hand experience of the problems which exist and to get a better sense of the needs and feelings in those areas.

He turned the Chair to Commissioner Todd Weston, who represents northern Utah on the Commission, for the portion of the meeting dealing with local issues. Commissioner Weston noted there were many state, city and county officials in attendance and invited comments from all of them. However, before the meeting was opened for public comments he introduced Region 1 Director Dyke LeFevre and asked him to give an update on current and future projects in the Region 1 area. Region 1 covers the area from Bountiful City north to the Idaho border and is heavily populated.

Region 1 Construction/Maintenance Project StatusDyke LeFevre introduced the Region 1 staff in attendance: Lynn Zollinger, Preconstruction Engineer; John Gunderson, Maintenance Engineer; Luke Mildon, Project Engineer on the US-89/91 project from the summit to Wellsville; Ed Williams, Field Engineer on that same project; Dennis Harper, Field Engineer on the Mantua Interchange project; and Nick Peterson, Field Engineer on the Wellsville Canyon project.

Dyke commented on the reason work was being done on the two major routes leading to Logan at the same time which was causing some problems getting to and from Logan. He explained the Bear River Bridge on SR-30 was rusting and corroding quite badly because of water which got up into the beams during the flooding of 1982-83. Our Structures Division recommended we get that corrected before there was a very serious problem, which we did. At that same time we started working on the projects in Wellsville Canyon. Because of the ground settlement problems on SR-30 we have been unable to complete that project which, unfortunately, has created an overlap of projects on these two highways. We are currently working on the second half of the SR-30 bridge and are waiting for the rest of the settlement to take place before we can finish rebuilding the structure. He also noted he didn't think SR-30 would have to be completely closed again because one-half of the road and bridge is operational and the other half should not interfere with traffic a great deal.

Commissioner Weston asked how much longer the settlement was expected to take on the Bear River Bridge project. Project Engineer Luke Mildon indicated settlement is expected to be complete around October, so we will be back into construction shortly after that. Dyke concluded that is getting into the winter season, so the project most likely won't be completed until next spring, but the highway will be open to traffic by late fall this year.

Dyke continued that probably the biggest project in the Region is on SR-91 in Wellsville Canyon. There are closures on the project at least twice weekly and that will continue while we excavate some of the embankments and move that material on the north side of the highway and get a frontage road, or haul road, developed there; that is expected to take at least six to eight more weeks.

Lynn Zollinger distributed a handout listing projects throughout Region 1 and continued an explanation of them. The handout listed projects recently completed (white pages), projects actively under construction and their percentage of completion (blue pages), upcoming projects which are in the design process or project development phase and the year in which they are programmed (yellow pages), and Maintenance betterment projects (pink pages). Lynn indicated he would briefly go over some of the more high-profile projects, but urged people to study the list themselves more thoroughly and if they had particular questions he would be happy to answer them or explain a project in more detail. Senator Holmgren commented that when UDOT distributes information for the public the project numbers don't mean anything, but a better description of the location of the project and the type of work being done would be more helpful.

Lynn referred to the list of upcoming projects (yellow pages) and particularly mentioned I-84 from Morgan to the Summit County line which is on schedule to be advertised this year for $25 million. It is for replacement of the existing bituminous surface with a concrete pavement, and also reconfigures the interchange at Morgan. He also noted the I-84 project from Blue Creek Interchange to Blue Creek Summit in Box Elder County which is scheduled for concrete rehabilitation in 1997.

On State Rehabilitation projects, SR-82 from Tremonton to Garland is intended to have a structural overlay next year. There are two separate traffic signal projects for installation of a total of ten new traffic signals at various locations which will be advertised this month, with principal construction being done next year. SR-30 from 6th West to Logan is in the project development phase; the project is being advanced to widen the roadway and provide shoulders.

SR-126 from SR-108 in Roy to 12th Street is a very critical and important project for widening the existing two lane road to four lanes and add two traffic signals at 2550 South and at Wilson Lane (21st Street). The Region is advancing the project to advertise next spring.

The Layton Hills signal coordination project is the coordination of several signals in the vicinity of the Layton Hills Mall and is scheduled for 1996. Another signal project for traffic signal work at six separate locations which is scheduled for advertising in 1995 includes signals at two very critical locations which have a high degree of interest; one is in West Point City at the intersection of SR-108 and SR-37 (300 North), and another is at SR-108 at 1800 North in Clinton City. A signal project to install left turn phasing at ten locations throughout Region 1 is scheduled for 1996, including two locations in Logan on SR-89 (4th North) and Main Street, and SR-91 (14th North).

Spot Improvement projects particularly mentioned were the intersection realignment of SR-165 and SR-101 in Hyrum scheduled for 1995, intersection modifications of SR-16 and SR-30 (Sage Creek Jct.) in Rich County scheduled for 1996, intersection modifications of SR-89 and SR-30 in Garden City scheduled for 1995, intersection modifications of SR-91 and SR-61 north of Richmond scheduled for 1997.

A project on the Cache MPO list for construction of left and right turn lanes at the intersection of SR-91 and SR-237 (Hyde Park Lane) is actually not an approved project yet, but the Region is anticipating advancing that through the design phase. Also, the construction of a right turn lane at the intersection of SR-91 and Providence Lane is similarly waiting for approval of the Cache MPO TIP, hopefully this fall.

Referring to National Highway System projects, Lynn noted the binwall repair project on SR-89 near the USU in Logan is an important project to be advertised this year, as well as the Logan Canyon project which anticipates the approval of the environmental document for improvements in the canyon from MP-375 to MP-405.

On the STP program, which is essentially federal-aid projects, there is a project for a new rest area at the summit of Logan Canyon which is to be constructed in 1996. A project for a Park & Ride lot near 1200 West in Logan has yet to be approved by the CMPO.

Lynn also mentioned some of the bridge replacement projects. The UPRR Viaduct and Weber River structure on Riverdale Road is scheduled for advertisement in 1996. That project is being advanced through the environmental phases right now, and it will have a dramatic effect on traffic flow. The project for three bridges and approaches in Logan Canyon is scheduled for 1996 and is in anticipation of the completion of the environmental document which is advancing through the final phases at this time. Hopefully agreement will be reached by all groups concerned and lawsuits and legal actions will be avoided. The Logan River Bridge replacement at the mouth of Logan Canyon is a project not affected by the environmental impact statement, and is also scheduled for 1996.

Lynn also remarked on Enhancements projects, which is a new area of funding under the federal ISTEA legislation. He again urged that everyone study the lists in more detail and he would answer any questions they had.

Lynn explained the Maintenance Betterment projects (pink pages) utilized a special class of funds which is at the discretionary use of the Region 1 office. The funds are prized rather highly and they try to distribute them on projects on existing roadways which have deficiency problems, and most are in the amount of $40,000. The intent is to do work to preserve the roadway and solve problems locally on the pavement surface.

Commissioner Weston thanked Lynn for the information. He pointed out how costly road construction projects are, and noted the three phases of the project to improve the road from Brigham City to Logan totalled over $40 million.

Local CommentsCommissioner Weston invited comments from the local officials and citizens.

SR-13, Brigham City to TremontonRobert E. Nelson, Mayor of Bear River City, said about four years ago he attended a UDOT meeting and mentioned a project on SR-13 from Brigham City to Tremonton. He said nothing has been done yet to improve the rough road and it looked like the project has been taken off the program. He presented a petition from citizens requesting that ". . . the Utah Department of Transportation resurface State Highway 13 which is a very old, rough, cement road running from Corinne through Bear River City."

Lynn Zollinger replied that there is a section of SR-13 in the program from SR-38 to I-15, including the 5th West bridge in Brigham City, scheduled for rehabilitation in 1996. That project represents a beginning of improvement on that highway and we will continue to request programming for phases of that highway going westerly from I-15 until the entire project is complete through Bear River City. Mayor Nelson said that section is not even close to Bear River City and Mr. Zollinger agreed, but said it is a start. Commissioner Weston thanked Mayor Nelson for his comments.

Logan Bypass Road - $75,000 Request for Feasibility Study Darla D. Clark, Mayor of Logan, read a letter from the Cache Metropolitan Planning Organization, Logan City, and Utah State University requesting $75,000 from UDOT to perform a feasibility study on a Logan Bypass Road. A grassroots planning effort called Cache 2010 was established four years ago to meet the challenges resulting from the rapid growth in their area. One of the main goals of the Cache 2010 group was to elevate transportation on a countywide basis and identify areas of concern for the present and the future. The need for a north-south corridor bypassing Logan was identified, and the general population favors the idea.

The Cache MPO has been unable to reach a decision on the bypass concept, which also inhibits completion of their Long Range Transportation Plan. A study needs to be done to obtain adequate data to make an informed decision. It appears logical the CMPO should spearhead this study, but their planning budget limits their ability to perform the detailed studies and that is the reason for the request of funding assistance from UDOT.

The Mayor indicated the letter was signed by herself representing Logan City; by George H. Emert, President of Utah State University; and James P. Gass, Executive Director of the CMPO; and also said Representative Fred Hunsaker was in attendance and was in support of their request.

Commissioner Weston said he was very familiar with their problem and it is one which has to be resolved. In Logan they have a unique situation where there is no freeway which bypasses them to take care of that traffic, so it all goes right down Main Street. He said he had asked Dyke LeFevre to bring some information on traffic counts in Logan. Dyke indicated that at SR-165 there was 26,800 Average Daily Traffic (ADT), that continues down to 300 South where it drops to 24,400 ADT, at 200 North it increases to 28,500 ADT and continues at that amount to 1400 North where it drops back to 23,600 ADT. An average number would probably be 26,000 ADT.

Commissioner Weston stated that the Commission is fully aware of the problem in Logan. He told the Mayor the Commission would consider the request and he personally would push to approve it, but planning fund monies are difficult to come by.

Cache County Highway PrioritiesLogan Bypass RoadHyrum Bypass RoadCache County Executive Lynn Lemon said the County officials met in preparation for this Commission Meeting and talked about their priorities, and he said he briefly discussed that with Mayor Clark. He stated Cache County's four major priorities are:

Improvements in Wellsville Canyon. It is a major project and they appreciate the work UDOT is doing. There is some inconvenience now but it will be well worth it when it is completed.

The second priority is SR-30. They appreciate the work on the Bear River Bridge and look forward to the time when that road is widened from Logan through the intersection of SR-23.

Logan Canyon is their third priority. He knows efforts are continuing to move forward on the project. Any expediency for that project would be greatly appreciated by them.

Widening SR-91 north of Richmond to the Idaho border.

Two other ideas the County would like to recommend to the Commission for consideration are the following:

Dealing with the Logan Bypass Road. They know there is a need for a feasibility study, but they realize that will take time to do. From the County's standpoint they would like to recommend that the State consider taking over 10th West, that the Woodruff School area and the residential neighborhoods surrounding the area be fenced to alleviate the safety problems, possibly develop an overpass so that residents could move from one side to the other, then put a light at 2500 North and SR-91. That would, in essence, provide a bypass through there on an interim basis. They realize that would not be a long-term solution, but it could be an interim solution until another bypass road could be developed.

Commissioner Weston asked if they had discussed that proposal with the Logan City Council and Jim Gass from the CMPO. He feels there needs to be a good interchange of ideas before anything is done to proceed with that type of proposal. Mr. Lemon said he did discuss it with the Mayor when the Mayor said they were proposing a bypass road. Mr. Lemon affirmed they definitely will make that a point of discussion with those other agencies in the future.

Hyrum City and the businesses on the north side of the city have approached the County about moving SR-101 from Highway 89/91 north of Hyrum to SR-165, rather than having to go through Hyrum. For the most part there is a road which goes between Hyrum and Nibley which could connect SR-89/91 and SR-165 and that is something the County would like the Commission to consider on a long-term basis.

Mr. Lemon commented that he knows there is a plan to widen SR-165 from Nibley to Hyrum and he thinks Hyrum City will speak about the concerns they have with that.

Mr. Lemon expressed the County's appreciation for the Commission's support and specifically mentioned a slurry seal project for the airport which the Commission approved last year to help preserve the runway, and which they just completed.

SR-165 through Hyrum CityBonnie F. Nielson, Hyrum City Councilmember, said she was representing Hyrum City. Mayor Haycock was unable to attend. She urged the Commission to put the widening of SR-165 back in the program. It has been moved on and off the program several times, and said she didn't see it listed on the handout from Mr. Zollinger. She read a list of concerns regarding SR-165:

This is probably the most dangerous section of SR-165 which has not been completed

Four lanes merging into two without a decrease in the traffic volume

Large volume of heavy trucks by both Johnson's and Parson's construction companies enter on this section that has not been widened

Numerous slow-moving farm equipment with no passing possible and motorists are very impatient

Employees driving to work at the packing plants and other Miller businesses

Mountain Crest High School students and faculty funnelling into two lanes

Poor visibility with the hill and the entry of the lower road

Proposed straightening of Hyrum City Main Street (SR-101) scheduled for 1995 should be tied to the design of SR-165

Councilmember Nielson said they appreciate what the Department has done, but hope UDOT will consider putting this project back in the program.

Commissioner Weston said the interchange is on the list, but there is a stretch of road in between which he has been concerned with getting completed. He asked Mr. Zollinger to make note that there is concern from the local officials as well as himself regarding this section of road. He told Councilmember Nielson they would give her request sincere consideration and would try to get the project back in the program as soon as possible.

Cache MPO ResponsibilitiesLogan Bypass RoadCommissioner Clyde commented that it sounded like the Cache MPO has a lot of work to do. Mr. Jim Gass, Executive Director of the CMPO agreed, but noted the comments dealing with Hyrum are out of their MPO jurisdiction, and that is the reason they have not engaged any studies in that area. Their jurisdiction begins at Nibley and goes northward to Smithfield and includes Logan City and that area, but it does not include Hyrum.

Cache County Councilmember Sarah Ann Skanchy interjected that the Logan Bypass road is not within the boundary of the CMPO. They were advised that the County would have to work through the CMPO in order to forward planning towards a bypass road. Commissioner Clyde said it seems like they have established a proposed route for the bypass. Mr. Gass replied that actually the feasibility study for which they had requested funding would be looking at a number of different alternatives; the route had not actually been selected at this time. Obviously a study would have to be done to determine the best route. It's possible it could remain at 10th West, but it could be at 12th West, at 19th West, or a number of different locations. It is difficult at this point to determine where that route would be, and it may or may not be within the boundary of the CMPO. Mr. Gass said he was not sure of Cache County's perception of the location of the bypass road, but as far as the CMPO is concerned there has been no location actually designated. Commissioner Weston asked how far west the MPO jurisdiction goes, and Mr. Gass replied it goes to about 1900 West. Commissioner Weston said the bypass road, or at least a portion of it, could be within the CMPO boundary.

Councilmember Skanchy said when they met last fall they were told they would have to go through the CMPO for planning. Commissioner Weston said what Commission Clyde meant is that if we are seriously looking at a bypass road, which we need to do, then maybe that area ought to be incorporated as soon as the study shows that's where it belongs, or extend the MPO to that boundary so that we can get more involved.

Mr. Gass said Commissioner Clyde's statement that the MPO has a lot of work to do is a valid one. They are a very new MPO--three years in existence--and they are slowly getting up to speed. They are all new at the process and recognize they have a lot of work to do, but they have a very aggressive group of individuals who are on the technical committee and they have a very active executive branch.

SR-13 through Bear River CityMr. Keith Johnson of Bear River City said he would like to emphasize Bear River Mayor Nelson's comments regarding the poor condition of SR-13. He recently spent seven days traveling through the state and never encountered another section of road, even those under construction, as bad as the road through Bear River City; from Corinne through Elwood it is very rough.

SR-126 near West Haven CityMr. Ken Baldwin, West Haven City Council referred to a project Lynn Zollinger had mentioned on SR-126 between Midland Drive and 12th Street for widening and signals. He asked if that would be widened to four lanes. Mr. Zollinger affirmed the project was to widen the road to four lanes. Councilmember Baldwin also asked if drainage would be included in the project from Midland Drive to the Weber River and Mr. Zollinger replied the drainage would be part of the project design.

North Ogden Connection to I-15Francis M. Warnick, Mayor of North Ogden, expressed appreciation for the work Region 1 is doing. He said Dyke LeFevre has been very cooperative concerning access from the freeway to North Ogden, Pleasant View and Harrisville. They appreciated the meeting staff had with them and their representatives and they want the Commission to continue to support the connection from I-15 to North Ogden. Commissioner Weston affirmed that is a high priority.

Brigham City Traffic ProblemsRobert V. Ebeling, a retired engineer and long-time resident of Brigham City, feels the Forest Street exit UDOT is currently working on will cause an absolute nightmare on Forest Street once people start using it. He asked that that situation be reviewed if it hasn't been done. It is already a big problem just to get across the main north/south arteries in Brigham City, like 5th West, at certain times of the day.

The railroad overpass is also a problem. He suggested someone from UDOT should get with Union Pacific and tell them a study has to be done, or the railroad should quit switching their trains in Brigham City, they should do it in Ogden. He said their city employees waste at least 5% of their time trying to get across that intersection.

Mr. Ebeling referred to 11th South on SR-91 and said that entire bypass on Main Street is getting more and more complex. A bypass and or access route should be considered for the future. The problem is being transferred down to Brigham City again with better and smoother flow. He thinks some kind of overpass in the future or some type of rerouting for people who want to exit that road to Brigham City should be considered.

Mr. Ebeling said another serious problem is the State owned and controlled traffic signals through Brigham City. The timing on the east/west direction is extremely inadequate to get across the intersections at Main Street, and there is a long wait for them to cycle again, even though there is no traffic on Main Street (north/south).

Forest Street InterchangeMr. Steven L. Hill, Brigham City Council, asked when the new Forest Street Interchange would be done. A number of citizens have expressed concerns about the possibility of traffic signals along Forest Street to help regulate the traffic flow because they do anticipate increased traffic.

Dennis Harper, UDOT Field Engineer, replied that we anticipate having the fill in next month, then nine to 12 months of settlement before the new structure can be constructed. He felt it would be about 18 months before that intersection would be open and operational.

Senator Holmgren commented that he appreciated the UDOT crew working on the interchange; they have been very good to work with.

Clint Topham added that citizens should understand that when we put a surcharge (extra fill material) on a structure area to let it settle, the settlement is not gauged by a time clock but rather we install instruments to measure the amount of settlement, and it's only ready when the appropriate amount of settlement has occurred--time is not the measurement factor.

Logo SigningUsed TiresState Representative David Ure said one of the problems he sees, not just in his area but throughout the state, is the expense of logo signs. The $2,200 annual fee plus the merchandiser purchasing their own sign is too costly for businesses in small towns like Taggert, Morgan or Coalville. Representative Ure said he has talked with Dave Miles concerning the matter. Mr. Miles has been very helpful, but he is not totally satisfied with the matter. Mr. Miles told him the company who has a contract on the logo signs is negotiating right now on I-215. UDOT says the numbers are there to justify the $2,200 per year for the sign, but he questions the $7,000 to erect one of the signs. Somehow there must be a way to lower the cost of the sign so the smaller businesses can afford it. He knows originally the logos were put in place for rural Utah, and he thinks it has totally backfired.

He suggested there should be some comparison with several different sign companies to look at those costs to see if they are justified. Commissioner Weston asked if we were in the process of renewing the contract. Dave Miles answered the logo sign contract is renewed every five years, and it covers the entire state under one contract. Commissioner Weston suggested this is a prime time to look at the situation.

There was additional discussion about logo signing and the use of an out-of-state company. Representative Ure said we can't afford to buy them out because the buy-out is around $3 million. We have a very small margin to renegotiate the contract. We might try to hold them hostage on I-215 to justify some other things, but we need to investigate that matter thoroughly.

Director Zwick informed Representative Ure that there are at least two local sign companies that will be competing for the contract on I-215 when it does come up. Sheldon McConkie added that local companies competed the first time a contract was let on a competitive basis, but an out-of-state contractor won. Commissioner Weston noted that one of the other alternatives we had before, and that was raised at the time we did the logo signing project, was to have the state install the signs. The state of Idaho installed their own logo signs when they first put them in, but he didn't know if they still did that, and he didn't know if that would save us any money.

There was additional discussion about the different sizes of logo signs, and the larger signs requiring larger and more costly equipment to install them, and going to the smaller signs which are easier to erect. Representative Ure said he has seen smaller logo signs being installed and suggested by going to two smaller signs rather than one large sign perhaps the construction costs would be less. The small signs have three merchandisers listed, while the larger signs carry six logos, and he also feels the fewer number of logos makes the small signs easier to read. Commissioner Weston said the size of the sign is determined by the number of applicants. Dave Miles added that when two small signs are used instead of a large one it is because they are different services, such as one sign listing service stations and the other will list food and lodging as opposed to one big sign which will mix two different services. Large signs are used when there is space for only one sign; if they can get two smaller signs in they would do that.

Commissioner Weston concluded that the Department is in the process of negotiating a contract and we will keep Representative Ure informed.

Representative Ure also commented that in Utah we are having a problem with used tires. There is a great deal of talk about using tires as crumb rubber in pavement. He has spoken with Wade Betenson concerning the process and it is being developed. The Representative suggested that the Commission be cognizant of the problem and the process and support that process as much as possible, but noting that safety and money also has to be first and second in our consideration.

Commissioner Weston assured Representative Ure the Commission and Department are well aware of the crumb rubber process, and we hope the technology will someday allow us to utilize it.

Director Zwick referred to the status of the crumb rubber technology and indicated UDOT is currently reviewing and keeping abreast of the process. He said, frankly we are able to use all of our surplus tires as fuel in cement plants right now, and Idaho will take what we don't use. Right now we don't have a crumb rubber plant in Utah and, therefore, would have to bring in Arizona crumb rubber when specified. We see a backoff on the Congressional side of that mandate that we have an established percentage and scaling up of crumb rubber use in our asphalt products. We are not convinced that it is a better product; we are convinced that it is being driven by the EPA. At this moment UDOT would like to move away from it because it is an inefficient use because of the cost.

Representative Ure said that is also what he has been told. He stated though that our cement plants are not handling our problems. We currently have four million used tires in piles in Utah; we are making about 1.3 million tires per year on current vehicles and we are only using about 600,000 tires a year, so we are having problems in Utah in getting rid of our used tires. We are working on getting them to Idaho or California, but every state is having problems with used tires.

Director Zwick agreed it is a problem and it is a current topic on the Standards side with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), it is a topic on the legislative side as it's being argued in Washington, and it will continue to have our attention.

Commissioner Weston commented that staff and Commission just returned from a western association meeting where crumb rubber was a big topic, but he didn't hear any technology
there which was very encouraging yet. We can't allow the integrity of our asphalt pavement to rely on crumb rubber regardless of mandates.

Hyrum Bypass RoadSigning at Intersection of SR-89/91 and SR-165Mr. Grant Gibbs, Paradise City Councilmember, referred to earlier comments about a bypass road in Hyrum and said it should also be noted that three trucking outfits in Hyrum go through there all the time, amounting to probably 400 to 500 trucks a day, plus other cattle trucks. Commissioner Weston said he thought that was what Cache County had been alluding to in their earlier comments about the bypass road. They felt a bypass road west of the present highway would pick up the traffic from those trucking companies.

Councilmember Gibbs continued that just south of Logan on the "Y" that goes to Hyrum on SR-165, the directional signing is not very good. There have been some bad accidents there because of inadequate signing. Commissioner Weston asked Dyke to look at the signing there to see if improvements could be made.

Layton Main StreetSignals at Layton City MallSR-89, Mountain RoadMr. Stuart Adams, Layton City Council, expressed appreciation to the Commission and Department for the overlay done on Layton Main Street which has really beautified their city. The Department is also aware of the challenges around Layton Mall and a lot effort has been spent there in trying to coordinate the signals. They are confident of the efforts of the UDOT staff and the signal coordination is scheduled to be done before the Christmas rush.

He said Layton is concerned with SR-89, Mountain Road. He knows great efforts have been made there and they are anxiously awaiting the environmental impact study and what actually might take place. They support funding of that project and are hopeful it will be successful. They know there is a critical need for the traffic signals and the serious situation that exists there with safety. They are appreciative of the efforts being made there to resolve the situation.

Commissioner Weston thanked Councilman Adams for his comments and assured him we will continue to work on Mountain Road.

Davis County Geographically Divided Between Regions 1 and 2Narrow Shoulders on State Roads in Davis CountyWest Davis HighwayUse of Non-Hazardous Ash in Road BaseSidewalks in Farmington & CentervilleState Representative Marda Dilree, said she represented Farmington, Kaysville and Fruit Heights in Davis County, but also wanted to express some overall concerns of Davis County. She is actually in attendance in support of the sidewalk issue for Farmington and Centerville.

She commented that Davis County is geographically divided between UDOT Regions 1 and 2. This is a concern which has existed for many years and is an issue which Congressman Jim Hansen worked on long ago. Centerville is actually in Region 1 and Farmington is in Region 2. As they attend hearings and meetings, their community is sort of fragmented.

They realize the great service provided by UDOT, the Wasatch Front Regional Council, and those who try to make sure Davis County gets their fair share of funding. However, the process is extremely cumbersome and it creates many problems, so much so that the Davis County COG has appointed and organized a Transportation Task Force as a subcommittee of their COG which Representative Dilree will chair.

They will be holding some strategic planning meetings on August 26-27 which will involve approximately 50 participants including staff from UDOT and WFRC. They feel a real need to unite their voices and put forth a united effort in identifying some of the critical transportation needs which exist throughout Davis County. They realize the problems and priorities of SR-89 and the I-15 Corridor from Farmington south to Beck Street which is in gridlock a large amount of time now. They will be coming back to UDOT to present that united front of all of Davis County and what their priorities are and hope the Commission will take into consideration that those county-wide meetings need to be looked at maybe on a little faster pace than they are scheduled.

Representative Dilree said she realizes UDOT's critical need is funding. As a Davis legislative group, all the legislators will be invited to this group to participate in this strategic meeting. They feel this legislative session will be a great opportunity to see support for the funding that UDOT needs to accomplish some of the tasks which are ahead, not only in Davis County but throughout the state, and hope they can be supportive. She said they need UDOT's input as to what funding packages UDOT sees as most acceptable to the citizens and to the Governor.

The West Davis Highway is something which Davis County feels strongly about. They were told there is no chance for that highway because of wetlands issues, but they will not believe that. They see some things happening in the Department of Natural Resources which may give them some help and provide mitigating options.

Another issue of concern to them is the narrow shoulders on the roads through some of the smaller communities in Davis County. Some have been widened to allow for at least curb and gutter and a little expanded shoulder area, but it seems to her there is still a great deal of need and effort to be made there on the state roads. Because of the increased population there are major problems with safety.

Representative Dilree also commented that Davis County would like to explore with UDOT the use of non-hazardous ash in road base. Davis County has an energy recovery plant, or burn plant, that disposes of their solid waste and they do have the ash byproduct.

Commissioner Weston thanked her for the comments and said he appreciated her reminding the Commission that the traffic problems don't stop at 600 North in Salt Lake City; the traffic gridlock doesn't stop until you get past Farmington. We must have a mind set change that the I-15 Corridor doesn't stop at 600 North.

He also commented that the West Davis Highway has been talked about for years and years, and if anything stops a project it is wetlands. The NEPA act can make projects so expensive they can't be done, but we are not through trying. He said he appreciated the invitation to meet with their group because he would like to keep abreast of what their problems are and how they would like to address them.

Concerning the division of Davis County between Regions 1 and 2, for a long time Davis County has tried to decide whether they should be in Region 1 or Region 2. Historically we've felt Davis County would probably receive more attention in Region 1 than in Region 2, but with the MPOs now he's not sure if it makes much difference. He said he would be happy to work with them as the Commission representative for that area.

Senator Holmgren asked if all of Davis County wasn't covered under the Wasatch Front Regional Council. Clint Topham replied that it is, but it is in two different urbanized areas which have the same boundaries as our Regions; the south half of Davis County is in the Salt Lake urbanized area, and the northern half is in the Ogden urbanized area and UDOT can't change that. Senator Holmgren said that is one of the big hangups; there is so much organization out there that no one knows what's happening.

Director Zwick said he wanted to make sure that everyone is clear that UDOT wants to serve the communities well in Farmington and Centerville and would be happy to put either Centerville into Region 1 or Farmington into Region 2 if that is what they want. It comes down to an issue of maintenance and snow removal and other issues which we think we have covered between the two regions nicely. But if UDOT can better serve either community by having them in one region or the other UDOT would be happy to accommodate. It really seems to be just those two communities; everyone north of Farmington wants to be in Region 1 and he thinks Farmington does also, and Centerville and Bountiful have expressed interest in staying in Region 2. However the communities would like it, UDOT can accommodate and would be glad to do.

Director Zwick disagreed with Senator Holmgren's comment that no one knows what's happening, because Region 1 and Region 2 know precisely where one ends and the other starts, and he hopes if there is any gap that used to occur that it doesn't now. The Wasatch Front Regional Council truly has all of Davis County. Senator Holmgren said his problem is not with UDOT because they are doing their job. The problem is the citizens don't understand where to go, what to do, etc. Director Zwick said maybe we need to do a better job in communicating to the citizens which regions or agencies serve them.

Commissioner Weston commented that historically the Commission district boundary has been different than the UDOT regional boundary. His boundary as a Commissioner for northern Utah does not fall along the same boundary line as between Regions 1 and 2. Representative Dilree commented that UDOT is doing an outstanding job of serving the needs of those communities, but some of it is cumbersome and there is still a concern of providing a united voice and prioritizing issues for the entire county. She acknowledged that UDOT has offered to accommodate their communities in whichever Region they prefer and they are trying to address that in their communities. She said she didn't mean to have her comments come across as negative.

Widening SR-165 south to HyrumSpeed Limit in NibleyHyrum Bypass RoadMr. Vincent Saunders, Nibley City Council, wanted to add their council's support to the idea of extending the widening of SR-165 south to Hyrum as quickly as possible. The widened section terminates on the south boundary of Nibley. They are very concerned about that because all the students who go to Mountain Crest High School drive that section.

He expressed appreciation to Commissioner Weston for the help he provided in getting that road widened through Nibley. It has been a blessing. Many people were against the idea of widening it to four lanes, but they are pretty happy with it now.

He said they have a major concern with the speed limit through Nibley. It is currently set at 45 MPH and an effort has been made by UDOT to increase that to 50 MPH. With the elimination of most of the trees and barriers which were protecting homes from trucks that get out of control and rocks which fall they feel that is a concern. They've been told by the local Sheriff and the State Highway Patrol that they do not issue tickets unless motorists are exceeding the speed limit by more than 10 MPH. Since law enforcement is not actively pursuing people until they hit 55 MPH they think that raising the speed limit to 50 MPH would result in traffic actually traveling 60 MPH. All the statistics are on UDOT's side, but they think common sense is on their side and they will work through Representative Olsen to see if they can't find a remedy if the speed limit issue becomes a problem.

They also want to support the idea of a bypass for Hyrum, whether it be north and south along 10th West, 15th West or 19th West corridor because it does severely impact Nibley.

He expressed appreciation to UDOT for all they've done. US-89&9l through the Canyon is causing a great deal of problems for traffic right now, but it will be a great asset. As a Morton employee, the Forest Street access will be a great time saver.

Mantua InterchangeMs. Darlene Caldwell, Mantua Citizens Committee, asked what the plans are for surfacing the Mantua Interchange, especially for winter.

Ed Williams, UDOT Field Engineer, replied that hopefully the interchange will be functional this fall, but that is a bit questionable right now. There will be access from Brigham City to Mantua. The access on 5th North will be open. There will be bituminous surface on the interchange this winter, but the final surface will most likely not be completed until next spring.

Legislative CommentsSenator Holmgren expressed thanks to the Commission for holding the Commission Meeting in their area and for the attendance of the entire Commission. He felt the communities had expressed their concerns very well and he hoped the Commission would consider their requests and put them on a priority list. He said if there are problems the legislators would be willing to work on things from a political standpoint. He said their area has a great deal of concern about two issues: roads and water. Commissioner Weston thanked him for his comments and said the Commission appreciates their relationship with the legislators.

Representative Bodily said his comments were being directed more to the citizens than to the Commission. Quite a responsibility is placed on the Commission who sets the priorities for projects. He commented that members of the legislature apply pressure on the Commission from time to time, but he thinks it is a much better system when it is left in the Commission's hands to make those decisions rather than turning it over to the Legislature to prioritize. He said legislators have been known to engage in pork barrel politics at times. He noted the bulk of the Legislature comes from the Wasatch Front between Ogden and Provo, and they could run right over the top of the legislators from rural areas if it was left to them to make the prioritizing decisions.

Representative Bodily continued that while the economy of the State has improved greatly in recent years, the Transportation Fund is really rather stagnant. The money mostly comes from the motor fuel taxes and as cars become more efficient they drive more miles on the highway with less gas and it puts a lot of pressure on the Transportation Fund. The Legislature has subsidized the Transportation Fund from time to time with General Funds--much of the Bangerter Highway was built with General Funds. He said he thinks in the coming years there will be a lot of pressure on the Transportation Fund to do the projects the citizens are looking at with the money that is available. He is not advocating a motor fuel tax increase, but it is a real possibility. This last year the Legislature passed a bill--Senator Holmgren initiated it and wanted the money to go into water development--providing $23 million which was split between transportation and water. Since we've had a surplus in the General Fund, that may be something that will be looked at, using General Fund money for transportation needs.

He said he did some research last year and there is $145 million in General Fund money collected from sales tax that is levied on the purchase of new and used cars, automobile parts, etc. So, there is a lot of General Fund money which is related to transportation and he thinks it is not a bad idea to look at that as a source of money to supplement the Transportation Fund. Every dollar put into the Transportation Fund accelerates the rate at which these projects can be realized.

He said he and Senator Holmgren have made a concerted effort to make UDOT as efficient as possible. They want as much of the transportation money going into the actual highways as possible, not into some office. The administrators and engineers have to be funded, but they also want that part of the process as efficient as possible so most of the money can come back to the highways. He feels the Department has made some remarkable progress and they hope to continue that effort.

Commissioner Weston thanked Representative Bodily for his comments.

Chairman Brown called a short break.

Planning and Programming - Airport Improvement ProjectsPhil Ashbaker reported there were two aeronautical projects for the Commission's consideration. The first is the Utah Airport Pavement Management System Plan. The FAA has asked us to develop a Pavement Management System to go along with our Pavement Condition Index Program. Monte Yeager of the Transportation Planning Division has put forth the application to develop a Pavement Management System for the airports. This will be dovetailed and use the same system and software the highway Pavement Management System is using so it will be more efficient in cost. It will help Aeronautics to manage the pavements of the airports to know a little better when particular rehabilitation, reconstruction or improvements need to be addressed. The total project cost is $58,095, with the FAA providing $52,832 and $5,263 coming from State funds. The Aeronautical Committee recommends the project for approval.

Commissioner Lewis moved to approve the project as recommended, it was seconded by Commissioner Clyde and carried unanimously that:

Utah Airport Pavement Management System (PMS) Plan approved for a total project cost of $58,095 - Federal $52,832 and State $5,263.

Phil continued that the second project was at the Morgan County Airport. He provided some background on that airport which is located near Mountain Green. It is a small airport nestled near the Browning Arms Company and is a very active airport. It has approximately 43 based airplanes and has a lot of activity for a small area.

Several years ago Morgan County and the State put a chip seal on the gravel-surfaced runway that was there to provide a hard surface. Over the years this surface has deteriorated to the point that now there is rutting and the ramp area of the pavement is broken up completely. Aeronautics has looked it over and come up with some ideas on how to salvage the airport and make it safe. They are recommending a renovation of the existing pavements to include some excavation, some road base in the ramp area and an asphalt overlay of 2-1/2 inches on the entire ramp area and the runway to give it some extended life while a study takes place to determine whether or not an airport should be constructed on a new site.

The FAA wants a study done as to whether or not the existing site is the appropriate place for a permanent Morgan County airport that needs to be improved somewhat, or determine if there is a better site elsewhere in Morgan County. They expect the renovation to give five to seven years of life to the airport, which is the time frame required to determine whether new construction should take place and get it into the program.

The Aeronautical Committee has met in Morgan County on site and looked everything over, talked to the Morgan County officials on the project and have decided this is the best interim solution. It is a joint State and local project with the State putting in 90 percent of the total cost of $133,267. No federal money can be used on the project because this airport is not on the National System. This site plan study which will be done would get a Morgan County Airport on the National System, which would then be eligible for federal funding.

Commissioner Larkin asked if, in fact, the existing site is determined to be the best site for the airport and it is accepted by the FAA, can we then improve on what we are doing now or will it be a complete reconstruction on the site. Phil replied that essentially the runway would be reoriented a few degrees and extended, so it would actually be a complete reconstruction.

Commissioner Clyde asked if the Morgan County Airport was originally a private airport. Phil replied it has always been Morgan County's; he has not known it to have been owned by anyone else. Representative Ure also thought it had always been the County's. Phil noted that Morgan County will put the project out to bid.

Commissioner Lewis moved to approve the request for funding. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Larkin and it carried unanimously that:

Morgan County Airport project approved for renovation of traffic surfaces, for a total project cost of $133,267 - State $119,941 and local $13,326.

Farmington/Centerville Sidewalk ConcernsFarmington City Mayor Gregory S. Bell introduced their delegation which included State Representative Marda Dilree, Centerville Mayor Priscilla A. Todd, Centerville City Manager David A. Hales, Farmington City Manager Max Forbush, President of the Farmington School PTA Joy Griffith, Chairman of the Reading School PTA in Centerville Tina Tate and her husband Steve Tate. Mayor Bell said during this meeting they have gained a great perspective of the many problems UDOT and the Commission has and recognize that they may be a very small part of the picture.

Mayor Bell explained that the Davis County School District decided a way to recoup $800,000 in funding was to do away with non-mandated busing. They did that very late in the season--in May 1994--and automatically the communities had what is called a non-funded parental mandate. They have very angry parents in their area who are saying historically their children have been bused to school and now all of a sudden they have children walking along SR-106 (Old Highway 89) which is an extremely busy road from Farmington to Centerville, very narrow with narrow shoulders and large areas without sidewalk.

They now have subdivision which have been brimming in west Centerville and west Farmington, west of this highway, who are bringing their children up onto this very busy highway without sidewalks and having to walk south to Reading Elementary across the Centerville border, and in some cases walking north to the Farmington Elementary School. This was an unanticipated situation. The county budgets were done, and they have limited funding in the first place.

Mayor Bell said they have discussed this situation with Dyke LeFevre and Lynn Zollinger who have been very gracious, and have also met with Director Zwick. They have had a fine reception at every level, but the bottom line is that they need on an emergency basis 2,500 running feet of sidewalk so that they can safely bring their children along this most dangerous stretch of SR-106. He doesn't think they are exaggerating the dangers of the narrow, winding road which has several hills. It is not a heavily populated area and people exceed the speed limit routinely going from one jurisdiction to another. It is on the border of UDOT Regions 1 and 2, therefore it hasn't had the attention it needs.

They have now got to address getting 4,000 students--who were formerly bussed--to school safely along routes where there hasn't been pedestrian access. From Farmington's viewpoint if they could have on an emergency basis $50,000 they will match that with their 25% contribution on the Pedestrian Sidewalk Program. He said they would appreciate the Commission's consideration of their request.

Mayor Bell said this, of course, is a county-wide problem. He is sending a letter to all the mayors in Davis County asking them to bring to their COG their needs for submission on a joint basis through Davis County for the ISTEA program so they can address this issue over the next 12 to 18 months. They understand UDOT is not going to have the kind of funding to address the whole problem right now. They are just trying to point out the very critical emergency areas for the Commission's attention now, then they will come back in a very organized fashion from Davis County on a consolidated basis for consideration through the ISTEA program.

Mayor Priscilla Todd of Centerville City provided a background of what their community has done concerning this issue. She said they find no fault with the school district in the decision they made. As unpopular as it may be to say, they believe they cannot continue to fund those things which people can do for themselves. The school district said they had advertised what they were going to do, apparently about a year ago, and the communities somehow missed that so it did catch them off guard.

Reading Elementary is a year-round school which has approximately 250 students, the majority of whom will be crossing Main Street (SR-106) to get to school. Main Street is a major arterial, which is also a designated truck route. Much of the problem on Main Street is that it is not fully improved; there are places where the shoulder has not been paved and there is no sidewalk, curb and gutter in areas.

When they were presented with the problem with the proximity of school starting on July 26, they felt a need to get something in place as quickly as possible. They arranged a meeting with UDOT, with the state and local representatives, the Farmington PTA, and the school principal. They made a proposal at that time of the possibility of looking at a school crossing guard to take the children across Main Street at a location to be designated through the joint efforts of Farmington and Centerville to the east side, bring them down to where there is existing sidewalk on the east and bring them back again at the street in front of the school. Because of the rolling nature of Main Street and the limited visibility this was deemed an unsafe alternative.

They reassessed the situation along with UDOT, and with UDOT cooperation they are going to be paving the shoulder of Main Street, then a 12-foot walkway will be striped off. They look at this as a short-term solution to an immediate need. They will still have children walking and riding their bicycles "on the street." They will somehow have to designate the area as a "no parking" area at least during the times when children will be going to and from school. It will be a very difficult area to control. During the winter this is a particularly bad area when there is fog and there are times when visibility is almost zero. The safety issue is a great concern.

In Centerville they have addressed the needs of sidewalk on Main Street. They have four schools within their community, all of which have access to and from school along Main Street. This is the last area they have where they have not addressed a sidewalk issue. They have done some preliminary engineering and their cost projections for this project is $175,000 which is $180 per lineal foot. The reason for the high cost is there is an extreme drop-off on the west side of the road which will require retaining walls, and more extensive engineering costs.

Mayor Todd said on this project they have managed to bring together two separate districts, two separate communities, they have an agreement with all the property owners involved for their participation in the project, they have the State endorsement of working through this with their representatives and they have worked with UDOT. To bring that many different entities together on an emergency situation and come to a working relationship is unique. They have done all within their power to address this need, but the funding issue is simply not within their reach so they are asking for support from the Commission.

Chairman Brown reviewed that the request of UDOT from Farmington City is for $50,000, and from Centerville City for $175,000 for a total of $225,000 for the emergency sidewalk project.

Commissioner Clyde asked why the cost was so high and Dyke stated it was because there is just no shoulder in some areas and the highway drops off and it will require some retaining walls to get the width necessary to construct the sidewalk, curb and gutter.

Commissioner Clyde asked if this work would qualify as an Enhancement project. Dyke replied that it would qualify. Commissioner Clyde asked if they had made application for those funds and Dyke replied they had not as yet but they have been advised of those funds. Their COG is looking at the possibility of developing an Enhancement project that would take care of the sidewalk needs throughout the entire county.

Commissioner Larkin noted that in the Enhancement area, one problem might be in being able to give them the money and them being able to use it timely in this particular situation. There are a lot of strings attached to that money that aren't involved in the Safe Sidewalk Funds.

Commissioner Clyde said he appreciated their position, but because the Davis School District has decided they are not going to do things the people can do for themselves, then that throws the burden on the Department of Transportation. Maybe we should take the same attitude they have. There are a lot of issues involved.

Commissioner Larkin asked if curb and gutter was also being constructed wherever the sidewalk was being constructed and Dyke replied that it was. The sections already built have curb and gutter.

Mayor Bell showed a map of the area and indicated the locations where the sidewalk was required. They are requesting 2,500 feet of sidewalk in Farmington on the west side of the street right now, and he noted their school has already started. They will proceed on the Enhancement project for the rest of the priorities throughout Davis County, but they understand they are 18 months away with that work.

Chairman Brown asked if they wanted this work done this fall. Mayor Bell said both city councils have set aside the funds for engineering, and the engineering is being done on both projects at the present time, so they are ready to go at any time.

Kristine Tate, representing Reading Elementary Community Council, said they are a decision-making council put into effect this year. They take the necessary meetings as they come along and make decisions for the elementary school in particular. This was not a Farmington or a Centerville issue, this was a Reading Elementary safety issue.

They meet monthly and they received notice of this busing decision from the school district who has turned the responsibility over to the school board, who in turn turned responsibility for the decision to some state funding. She said they found out about the situation in the middle of May and at that immediate moment their group took action to alleviate the situation which had been created. Their soonest action was the first week of June where they approached Centerville City. Had they known sooner they could have made application in time for Safe Sidewalk money. It was their understanding this application should have been submitted by the end of May.

She said they began with the cities to see what part they could play. She said they didn't call the UDOT Region, they didn't gripe, they didn't moan or complain, they didn't ask someone else to fix the problem and tell them to make sure their children get on a bus. They suggested to the PTA and to the parents that this was their responsibility now to get their children to school safety. There are many parents who are carpooling. The principal and other people are working out areas to relieve the congestion, where they can park, where they can or cannot enter into the school area, etc.

She said they are not coming to the Commission and asking them to fix the problem because they are unwilling to do anything themselves; they have gone through every necessary channel to find out how to solve the problem. They did meet with the school district as a community council, they did hear their reasons for dropping the ineligible riders. They suggested many proposals to the school district to allow them the opportunity to reduce their costs. They suggested having all the children meet in one certain area, etc. They had many proposals go forward, but they just weren't feasible, so they searched out other avenues.

Mrs. Tate said the reason they are at the meeting is because they understand the Transportation Commission has the authority to deviate from policy and can program funds even though they did miss the May deadline for application for the Safe Sidewalk Funds.

Mrs. Tate said she is very pleased with all the steps they have taken and that through one little elementary school, one body of 25 people, they are on the road to furthering this sidewalk issue and will be able to benefit these other children in other schools that are in the same situation by leading them to the point of making application for the ISTEA money. They are doing everything they can and are willing to do their share of the work, but they know this situation cannot be fully alleviated for at least a y
ear.

Mayor Todd responded to Commissioner Clyde's comment about the school district's decision to quit doing things the people could do for themselves and that possibly UDOT should take that same position. She said as mayor of the community she appreciates having people do as much as they can. However, she would like to re-emphasize that the parents have done everything within their power; they are carpooling, but they cannot put in sidewalks. The parents cannot meet their needs without the help of the cities, and the cities cannot meet the needs without UDOT's help. The timing of this issue happened after their budget proceedings were completed, and it was past the deadline for application for Safe Sidewalk Funds. With that in mind they are requesting help from the Commission to find funding to take care of their immediate problem.

Chairman Brown suggested it could be from a legislators standpoint that there needs to be a look at a safety component on the public education transportation reimbursement formula. To his knowledge it is driven only by distance now with no reference to safety. He thinks that original formula was built on a very urbanized area where there were sidewalks in place.

Representative Dilree said she and Senator Steel last year worked on a bill that addressed hazardous busing routes, some of the challenges they face in even identifying those routes, and the critical busing funds that are available for those types of routes. It's being handled differently throughout the state. Chairman Brown said he knows that's not the solution to the problem today.

Representative Dilree continued that another thing that is very important to realize is that transportation and public safety is a shared responsibility. Part of this is the school district's responsibility. Addressing a plan like this without alerting the communities earlier on--even though they thought they had--they realize they had not made the effort adequate enough so that the communities could help address the situation.

Another critical point is to realize that this is a State road within Farmington and Centerville so it is part of UDOT's shared responsibility to help the communities solve this issue. We may need to look at what the pressures are and the needs of the school districts. Are we going to have more school districts doing this same kind of thing unless we address some kind of hazardous busing route criteria and funding a little differently.

Chairman Brown said he understands we have allocated all the Safe Sidewalk money in the current year. He asked staff if it was the disposition of the Commission to try to find the resources, what sources of funding are available to consider.

Clint Topham replied that Safe Sidewalk money for this year has not actually been allocated, but it is in the process of being done. He explained the Legislature appropriates an amount of money for safe sidewalk projects along state routes. That amount was $1 million each year, but a few years ago the Legislature cut it to $500,000. Traditionally that money has been distributed to the UDOT regions based on county population and the regions then take applications from cities and counties to use the money on sidewalk projects on state roads. The law says it has to be matched 25% by the applicant. Clint said to his knowledge the law doesn't say the funding has to be distributed that way; the Commission could choose to spend all that money in one county if they chose to do so. In each of the regions they look to the PTAs to help prioritize the roads along which those funds will be spent.

Clint continued the Safe Sidewalk Program has been developed by the regions and Region 1 has completed their program for this year's funds, that is why the statement was made that the cities were too late to make application for those funds. Technically those priorities could be changed, but that would mean taking funds from a project in another area.

Clint supposed the State Construction Fund could be spent for sidewalks, but the Legislature has already given the Commission some feel for their prioritization by indicating how much of that Construction Fund they thought should be spend statewide on sidewalks, that being $500,000. Because of that, the Department has a policy which says when we build state roads with state construction funds normally we build the road and we expect the local communities to build the sidewalks; we normally don't build new sidewalks in connection with highway projects. Our policy says that if we do reconstruction on an existing road and there are sidewalks already there and they are in bad condition we will replace them.

Referring to the ISTEA Enhancements Funds, Clint said he wanted to caution everyone that he didn't think there was enough in that fund to meet all of the needs of the sidewalks which are going to come forward from Davis County because of this issue. That is just one county and he supposed there would be applications from other counties. This project would have to compete with other projects for those funds. He doesn't want everyone from Davis County and Farmington and Centerville leaving the meeting thinking that those Enhancements funds are the panacea for all their sidewalk problems.

Commissioner Weston asked where the funds would come from in State Construction. Clint replied the funds would have to be taken from another project. The Region would be asked how this sidewalk project stacked up against their other projects in the program priority-wise. Dyke LeFevre replied he didn't know what project he would take it from.

Dyke pointed out that whenever sidewalk, curb and gutter is constructed along state highways UDOT extends the pavement back from the edge of the road to match the curb and gutter. He explained one thing both Region 1 and Region 2 are doing to help the communities in this situation is that we are anticipating this curb match before the curb and gutter is actually constructed. That extended pavement will be in this fall, so they can have the advantage of having that wider shoulder. We will place the pavement to within six inches of the anticipated edge of the curb so they will have room to put the forms in for the future curb and gutter. This widening work will be done along the full length identified by both cities; the areas will be widened about ten feet.

John Gunderson said he wanted to clarify there are approximately 1,800 feet in Region 1 and about 1,000 feet in Region 2 where they are planning to do the work. That represents a fairly substantial cost and does not include anything for drainage or for the retaining wall. That is strictly widening the pavement ten feet. John said that Farmington City Manager Max Forbush had just indicated to him that there is another section now farther north in Region 1 is not included in our plans at this time. The work currently planned in Region 1 and Region 2, takes us down to the street that goes down to the elementary school and includes nothing south of there. Mr. Forbush interjected that additional section is 760 feet long. They have spoken with the property owner and they believe he is willing to deed additional right-of-way so a retaining wall would not be needed there, and Farmington would be willing to participate in part of the cost as far as fill and widening the shoulder to accommodate the paving if UDOT would be willing to do that.

David Hales, Centerville City Administrator, said in his past discussions with Larry Kirby of Region 2 he has oftentimes mentioned Region 2 has a real backlog of grants which have been issued for projects in prior years, but for some reason the local jurisdiction has been unable to commence construction. He suggested possibly those funds could be utilized for emergency situations like this.

Mr. Hales said he also wanted to clarify that the total amount of money between the cities they would be asking UDOT to provide would be $181,250, and the cities would be providing a contribution of 25%, amounting to $56,250. The $175,000 previously mentioned was the total cost for Centerville's section and did not consider their 25% match.

Lynn Zollinger stressed that on the last go-round of Safety Sidewalk projects in Region 1 they had $800,000 in requests, but the Region only had a total amount of funding of about $127,000, including the cities' participation. Only the highest priority projects could be funded.

Commissioner Clyde said it seems there are a couple of other issues involved. The school district has created an unsafe student condition and considering the problems UDOT is faced with coming up with funding it seems the school district has an obligation to backfill this until the work can be done. He also commented that all these subdivision have been before the city and county planning commissions and they have been approved. He asked the local authorities when they approve these developments, do they do anything about requiring the subdividers to provide safe transportation, safe egress and access to the facilities the residents will be utilizing.

Max Forbush replied that in Farmington they have a policy that when a new subdivision goes in, even if it's up against a State highway, they put in curb, gutter and sidewalk. He thinks they do the same thing in Centerville. In this situation some areas are not developed, but are open fields or there are existing homes which were lotted off years ago when there were not many homes and they were not in subdivisions.

Commissioner Weston asked the cities if they had pursued that and asked the property owners if they would be willing to participate knowing that they are going to have to do so at some point in the future anyway. Mr. Forbush said that on the 700 foot section that was discussed earlier, the property owner is willing to deed some of his land to the state in order to accommodate the widening.

Mr. Hales said in Centerville's case the six properties involved all have a residence built on them. They are very deep lots with existing homes and steep driveways that are all going to be severely impacted by adding the sidewalk. They do have two subdividers who have built between Lund Lane and Reading Elementary and they have installed all curb, gutter and sidewalk along their developments.

Commissioner Weston said he is having difficulty trying to determine where this amount of funding can be obtained. He also commented that he is a bit tired of the Department paying for problems that the school districts create when the school districts get most of the tax money. It is a difficult situation, and transportation funds are very tight. He said he knows this is not the only situation like this in the state; he is aware of another school district in exactly the same position. He feels this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Mayor Bell said they were told that statewide there were 4,800 students bussed who were non-subsidized. Of that 4,800, Davis County had 3,900.

Mr. Farrell Cook West Point City Council said they had the same problem. It is a county-wide problem because of a mandate of the school district. He thinks their people have talked to some of the UDOT staff where they have students who will be walking on state highways where there is a shoulder of about two feet. He doesn't know how to solve the problem immediately. He knows their PTA people and those who are on their city council have discussed it and are running up against the same kind of problems as has been discussed here. He wanted to reiterate it just isn't Farmington and Centerville with this problem, and Commissioner Weston could be right that other people will be in with similar requests for funding assistance.

Chairman Brown said there obviously is no easy solution to the problem. However, the efforts to which UDOT has committed to widen the shoulder is an improvement on the present condition. He said he hopes the locals can see the dilemma the Commission is faced with in trying to find some resources in the short term to try to deal with the situation.

Commissioner Weston said he fully understands the situation and he knows of other areas faced with a similar problem, but that doesn't make it any easier for Farmington and Centerville to solve their problem.

Commissioner Weston made a motion to defer action on the matter until a subsequent meeting in order to discuss the situation with UDOT staff to see if funding can be found. A decision cannot be made today.

Chairman Brown asked the cities if the Commission delayed action until the September 9 Commission Meeting would that put the cities in a time frame where it would be impossible to respond this fall and would have to defer any work until next spring. Mayor Bell said realistically they were hopeful of spring, so that would be fine. Max Forbush said the widening of the shoulders which UDOT will be doing will help alleviate the problem right now, but there is still the 700-foot section which has not been included.

Chairman Brown asked if that 700-foot section could be included in the other work UDOT is doing. John Gunderson said the right-of-way needs to be looked at to see if it's feasible to put the fill in. He personally has looked at the other sections but has not seen the 700-foot section.

Commissioner Clyde asked if there was any way some temporary Jersey barrier could be used to separate the children from the traffic to provide a safe passageway. John Gunderson said there really is no shoulder on the highway, so there would be no room to place the barrier.

Commissioner Weston said he wanted to make sure that extra precaution is taken when doing this work. We will have big equipment working along the edge of the road where the children are supposed to be walking and we've got to be doubly cautious.

Commissioner Lewis said with respect to the overall funding, he recognizes this is a short term emergency situation. He would like to ask staff to indicate what the overall policy is for who normally would pay for this kind of a project and how it would normally be handled. He thinks it may be that developers would do some of it as they go through, there are Safe Sidewalk funds, places where we replace sidewalk, but we normally do not put in new sidewalk. Clint agreed it would be an odd project for us to do just a sidewalk project outside of the Safe Sidewalk Program. Even when it is part of that program a city or a county is the sponsor of the project and they actually do the project and we reimburse them for 75% of the cost. There was discussion about sidewalk construction in different situations.

Commissioner Lewis said he is used to the notion of a special improvement district of some sort that includes a sidewalk, or the city does it and the residents who directly benefit pay for it over a period of time. Obviously that doesn't apply quite as directly in this situation. He said he is just trying to be informed about how we normally participate in sidewalk probjects because this is a difficult situation. Clint stated that outside of the Safety Sidewalk Program he doesn't remember of UDOT ever doing a sidewalk project.

Representative Dilree said road construction costs have escalated, and the same is the case with sidewalks and any kind of construction. She indicated in north Farmington a few years ago they did establish a special improvement district, but it took them a good two years to move it through. She also discussed the exorbitant costs it forced on some property owners. Communities do pay their share, but it is very costly and along state roads they try to get as much participation from UDOT funds as possible.

Commissioner Weston restated his motion that action be deferred on the matter until the following Commission Meeting on September 9 to allow time to consider possible funding sources and also requested staff to determine if it is possible to include widening and paving the additional 700-foot section of shoulder. Commissioner Clyde seconded the motion, but said the school districts who make these decisions present a serious challenge and word must get back to them that to unilaterally make these decisions creates serious problems for others. The motion passed unanimously that:

Action deferred to September 9, 1994 Commission Meeting on request from Farmington City and Centerville City for $181,250 in funds to construct 2,500 feet of sidewalk along SR-106, and the cities would be providing a contribution of 25%, amounting to $56,250; further that UDOT staff consider whether an additional 700-foot section of shoulder along SR-106 could be widened and paved in addition to the 2,800 feet of shoulder the Department has committed to widening and paving this fall.

Commissioner Lewis commented to Representative Dilree that maybe there is a legislative solution, at least to the notice problem, that says school districts or school boards can't dump a problem like this without a year's notice, or something similar.

Planning and Programming - Increase in FundingForest Street Interchange Bird Refuge DetourDave miles stated there is a request for an intersection improvement on State Route 13 as part of the Forest Street Interchange project. This is an expansion of the project which requires $100,000 additional funding.

Dyke LeFevre explained at the intersection between 2600 West and Reeder Road we have 26-foot wide pavement. During the peak hours when Thiokol traffic travels through that area there are about 700 cars an hour going through that intersection. If someone needs to turn onto Reeder Road, which is the temporary detour to the Bird Refuge and for people who live on the west side of the interstate, it totally stops traffic behind them on the narrow, two-lane road and would create a very unsafe situation; there is no way to get around the turning traffic. Staff felt that even though this is a temporary detour it is a safety feature we should put in at the intersection.

The intersection improvement will involve widening the intersection to provide a left turn lane for westbound traffic, and will provide a right turn lane for eastbound traffic; it is a "T" intersection. When we are through with the project the traffic volumes will drop on this road, but the improvement will still be functional. Senator Holmgren indicated he understands these improvements would be done anyway when the SR-13 project is done in the future, so this work will just be done sooner and will not have to be done again.

Commissioner Lewis asked if it wouldn't be less expensive to have a flagger directing traffic at that location, but staff indicated this is a situation which exists 24-hours a day and widening the intersection is the best solution.

Dyke said we originally thought FHWA would not participate in this improvement, but staff has done some research and found out where the warrants are coming from, and it definitely has a warrant for this kind of intersection improvement. With that staff feels we can get federal funding; if not we will have to utilize state funding. He said they were requesting Commission approval for either type of funding.

Don Steinke commented his staff is currently reviewing the situation to determine if FHWA can participate and hopefully they will. If FHWA can participate then we will have to match it with 10% state funds.

Commissioner Weston moved to approve the $100,000 increase as requested. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Larkin and it passed unanimously that:

Approval to expand Project DPI-0045(001) & INH-15-8(94)366, Forest Street Interchange, to include intersection improvements at detour to Bird Refuge from SR-13 at 2600 West, and approval of increase of $100,000 in either federal or state funding for those intersection improvements.

ResolutionI-15 Widening from SR-75 to 820 North, University Avenue Interchange Modifications, SR-89 Connector, and Center Street Interchange Modifications, Provo City, Utah CountyKim Schvaneveldt reported that following the hearing that was held July 6 on this project, they were presenting a resolution to the Commission requesting approval or comments on the location and design features of the University Avenue project. Staff is asking the Commission to support the preferred alternative, and he noted this is really a combination of about four projects which are interrelated.

Commissioner Lewis commented he was the Commissioner "in charge" of the hearing, but in the normal sense of chairing the meeting it was the open forum public hearing which provides an opportunity for people to make statements on an individual basis to the commissioner. There was a great deal of activity at the hearing with people getting individual information, however, there were only a couple of people who chose to make comments for the record and those comments were included in a transcript. He noted they did stay late at the hearing in order to facilitate anyone who wanted to make comments, but no one else commented.

He continued that the open forum meeting takes a little getting used to, but he feels more information gets into the hands of the people who do attend. There were a lot of good visuals on the project and staff available to answer questions directly.

Region 3 Director Alan Mecham said this project has expanded. The environmental assessment was done by Horrocks Engineering. They began with the connection from I-15 to SR-89 in south Provo. That project, because of segmental issues and environmental concerns and overall traffic concerns, included the widening of a section of I-15 from two lanes to whatever we deem it needs to be in the future, then it expanded on to the Center Street Interchange as the preferred alternative to get people to the Provo Airport. Now the project involves about four different transportation segments which have been combined in this resolution, and the preferred alternative for each of those is outlined in it.

Clint Topham said he agrees with the resolution, but the Commission needs to know a little bit about the history of this project and understand how it came about. It is a project that now could be $20 million or more to widen the interstate, $29 million for the interchange, plus some work on Center Street, as well as on the connector which they've got most of the money for. Staff needs to find out what the Commission's commitment is to this project.

Clint continued that as the project started out the people from Provo City came to Governor Bangerter and said if they could come up with the money to do the interchange project would the Transportation Commission put in their program in a future year the amount of money to widen the lanes on the interstate. Governor Bangerter asked how much that would cost to widen the interstate and Provo City represented that would be about $6 million. The Governor had some of the former Transportation Commissioners in and asked if they would consent to do that project for $6 million and they agreed to do it.

Since that time Provo City has not been able to get the discretionary funds to do the interchange. The widening of the interstate has grown from $6 million to $20 million or more. We don't have the money in the STIP to do the project at that amount and staff needs to know the commitment of this Commission to supporting the project.

Clint restated he has nothing against the alternative which is being brought forward. It has been through the public hearing stage and a preferred alternative needs to be addressed. But there are some big funding issues which need to be worked out. He felt it would be appropriate for the Commission to adopt a preferred alternative. Chairman Brown expressed concern that that would send a message out that the Commission is committed on the funding. We support the hearing and the preferred alternative but this does not represent the fact that the project can be funded.

Commissioner Lewis made a motion to approve the resolution as to the preferred alternative pending a thorough review of funding for the entire project.

Commissioner Clyde said he had attended a number of meetings concerning this project and he didn't recall much comment about the extensive widening of I-15. Clint commented he thought part of that was because Provo City has said that is UDOT's part. He thinks Provo feels that the Commission is going to step up as far as helping them with their part of the project as well.

Commissioner Clyde asked if University Avenue is contingent on widening I-15. Clint replied that Region 3 feels the widening of I-15 is a higher priority for them than realignment of the interchange.

Director Zwick said there is even discussion that Novell may be centering on a campus environment, but he doesn't see evidence of it. That may be a reason to maybe be a bit cautious to how much is committed to that road. Commissioner Clyde said he is reluctant to commit to the I-15 widening with the resolution on the interchange.

Alan Mecham said what Clint is saying is in the meeting which was held years ago with Governor Bangerter, to Provo City and to Novell and to whoever else attended that meeting, the commitment was made from the Commission and the Department that whenever Provo City had the funding in line for the interchange, UDOT would step up with the funding to widen I-15, in addition to what we would need to put into the interchange. People have taken that commitment very seriously. Now we need to really look at what our priorities are and what we need to do down there on this whole package.

Horrocks Engineering was hired to do the environmental work on the interchange and the connector to US-89. That expanded to cover Center Street and the widening of the freeway which was not originally part of this project but now has become part of it. By adopting the resolution he didn't think the Commission would be changing anyone's mind on that project.

Clint said what we are trying to do is to get the environmental process complete on this project before November 24 so that if funds become available we can spend them inside of the air quality time frame. There is a sense of urgency for that.

Dyke LeFevre said a long range commitment needs to be made on I-15 because of the configuration of the interchange and the width of the structures are conducive to that.

Alan Mecham commented that a commitment to widen I-15 is in our long range plan and is being developed by the Region and will be put into the STIP as they see fit unless politically we are induced to do otherwise. They feel they have a handle on that and it will be presented to the Commission in a regular STIP form as to what they feel needs to be done. Their traffic projections indicate that will probably need to be done around the year 2000 to accommodate traffic. They did not want to segment this project as far as environmental work, and that is why there are basically four transportation sections and needs being presented in this one resolution. They know the work will have to be segmented in construction because of the tremendous cost.

Provo City does have over $7 million in Demonstrations Funds to build the connector from I-15 to US-89 and they need to get that money spent. There is a need for them to get this process done environmentally so they can proceed with their design and construction plans on that segment of this project. There is no funding for the rest of the project.

There was additional discussion about the actual wording of the resolution and whether it would commit the Department to actually constructing the projects. Director Zwick said he doesn't know any other way it could be stated; it just defines the preferred alternative which is clearly the "build alternative" as opposed to a "no build alternative."

Alan Mecham explained what the resolution is saying is that the Commission is adopting the alignment or alternative which was presented at the public hearing. We are not doing anything as to what will happen beyond that. It is merely the environmental portion of the project where the various alignments and alternatives were presented and this resolution merely adopts preferred alternatives.

Director Zwick commented that approval of the resolution is for the location and design and is very much in accordance with the NEPA process which then allows the consultant to advance the preferred alternative design.

Commissioner Larkin commented it would also allow property owners to develop their property, which they probably can't do now; the whole thing is in limbo until a preferred alternative is selected.

Commissioner Lewis asked how long the environmental work is good. Dyke replied it is good for five years as it stands. After that we must look at the environmental process to determine if anything has changed and if it still stands we get another five years.

Chairman Brown said he feels the resolution is okay but some intent language can be added in the motion if the Commission feels strongly about it.

Commissioner Lewis moved that the resolution be approved pending a review of funding for all projects. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Clyde and it passed unanimously that:

WHEREAS, in accordance with State and Federal laws, a combined public hearing was held at the Provo City Center on July 6, 1994 by the Utah Department of Transportation to discuss the location, design features, and the environmental effects of I-15 widening from SR-75 to approximately 820 North (Provo), University Avenue interchange modifications, SR-89 Connector, and Center Street interchange modifications, and

WHEREAS, location, design, and environmental aspects of the project were discussed at the hearing, and

WHEREAS, as a result of the public hearing, the preferred alternatives presented at the hearing, identified as the following: I-15 Widening - Build alternative; University Avenue interchange - Build alternative 2C; SR-89 Connector - Build alternative option C; Center Street interchange - Build alternative 1, and described in the environmental document and attached hereto have not changed, and

WHEREAS, the Utah Transportation Commission has considered all testimony given at the hearing and the social, economic, environmental and other aspects of the proposed route;

NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Utah Transportation Commission concurs and supports the location and design features of the proposed project as a result of the public hearing.

Pavement Management SystemDave Blake presented information to the Commission on the Department's Pavement Management System. He indicated there were 60 engineers from throughout the Department who participated in a three-week course from Michigan State University which was teleconferenced throughout the state at various locations.

Pavement Management is one of six systems which was mandated by ISTEA. All the systems are coming along, but Pavement Management is a little further advanced; the others are Safety, Bridges, Congestion, Transit, and Intermodal. The function of these systems is to provide information to assist managers at every level to make better decisions. Our resources become more and more dear as they become less available, and as the needs grow beyond our ability to fund them we need to make better decisions; that is the purpose and drive behind management systems.

Pavement Management is assigned to three major areas within the Depar
tment. The gathering of data relative to our pavement conditions lies with the Planning Statistics Division. The analysis methods and output of the data that is collected is the responsibility of the Roadway Management Division. There is also a feedback process and project level which is the responsibility of the Project Pavement Management Unit in the Materials Section.

The Department spends $4 million each year gathering information. The Pavement Management System will help us make better use of that information. We are presently computerizing much of the work which was previously done manually.

The Department will continue to develop and implement and improve the system and by January 1995 information will be going back out to the regions and districts.

Don Steinke said his staff has been working very closely with Dave Blake and his staff on this system and they support the content and approach UDOT is taking. They see some benefits of the system and he asked the Commission to continue to support the process and commit the necessary resources to get this system up and running. They feel it will provide some good assistance to the pavement selection decision process.

Chairman Brown asked if Mr. Steinke sees any changes coming that the Department may not be programming for or becoming prepared for. Mr. Steinke replied he is unaware of any. The ISTEA of 1991 spelled out these various management systems, and he feels they will continue even into the next reauthorization bill. He thinks we are headed in the right direction, and if any changes do occur he thinks UDOT will be able to respond.

Commissioner Weston said he thinks the whole process will get the support of the Commission as long as the Commission is involved with the results. They've got to be kept abreast of what the results are really showing. Dave replied that is really the target of the annual Preservation Workshop, to provide that information to the Commission.

Aurora Main StreetClint explained to the Commission that several years ago Sevier County approached the Commission about the cutoff from SR-50 through Aurora and over to I-70 and SR-24 and putting that section of road on the State Highway System. The Commission agreed with that and passed a resolution on February 14, 1992 saying that road would become a state highway only when certain conditions were met concerning the width of the right-of-way and ownership of the right-of-way, etc.

Aurora City and Sevier County have been working on that since that time, and have now met those conditions. Richfield District Engineer Ross Christensen has been in contact with them throughout the process and has written a letter certifying they have met those conditions. Headquarters is going to write a letter back to the District instructing them to begin maintaining that section of road.

The Commission does not need to take further action because they have already passed the resolution, but he wanted the Commission to know the road will now be on the State System, effective the date the letter is written from headquarters. No mention was made of what the State Route number would be on the section of road.

Commissioner Weston stressed that the signing needs to be improved indicating access to SR-24 from Aurora.

Legislative Task ForceSenator Holmgren commented on the Legislative Task Force which he chairs and said what they want from the Department is a priority list of projects which contains information and is in a format that is useful to the legislators. That will be an agenda item at an upcoming next Task Force meeting. He said they would like to go back two years with the STIP and see where we are with the projects--were they built, when were they built, were they deferred, etc.

He stressed he personally doesn't want the Legislature to be responsible for prioritizing highway projects and he is trying to stay on top of that matter and will keep the Department informed. He also suggested if the Department hears rumors about what the Task Force is doing he hopes they will come to him and let them know. He intends to involve the Department in anything they do.

He said he didn't think there were any major problems with how the Department is operating--they are doing the work. But he thinks the public feels differently and it's going to require a great deal of public relations work to tell the Department's story. The Legislature is concerned because they hear the complaints from the public and in a 45-day session it's tough for the legislators to get up to speed on what the Department is accomplishing.

Senator Holmgren said more funding is needed for transportation and they intend to ask for some in the Legislature, but they need to have some priorities from the Department to show the people what is being built with those funds. He referred to the Bangerter Highway which has been constructed mainly with General Fund money--that is a tangible product which citizens understand. Those are the kinds of projects the Legislature needs to show citizens.

He stressed his support of the Transportation Commission and Department and his desire for a good working relationship.

Next Commission MeetingsUpcoming Commission Meetings were scheduled for the following dates and locations:

September 9, 1994 at 9:00 a.m. in Vernal

September 30, 1994 at 9:00 a.m. in Salt Lake City

November 4, 1994 in Davis County

Representative Marda Dilree invited the Commission to meet in Davis County for the November 4 meeting and said she would make the arrangements. She suggested they could give the Commission and staff a preview of their Strategic Plan from their COG transportation group.

Forest Highway TourThe Forest Highway Tour is scheduled for September 14-16 in southwestern Utah with UDOT staff, the Commission, FHWA and Forest Service personnel. Dave Miles reported there are three projects that will be reviewed. In Fishlake National Forest they will tour a couple of sections of SR-153 between Beaver and Junction, and another section of Forest Road south of Panguitch Lake to SR-14. The Forest Service will also bring a video tape of a section of road in the Monticello area, Hearts Draw to SR-211.

Staff will depart from Salt Lake the afternoon of September 14, stay overnight in Beaver, tour SR-153 the morning of September 15, and in the afternoon tour the road south of Panguitch Lake, then stay overnight in Panguitch. On the morning of September 16 there will be a meeting and viewing of the video of Hears's Draw and decisions will be made on the projects.

Chairman Brown thanked the local representatives and citizens for their attendance and participation at the meeting.

The meeting adjourned at 1:00 p.m.

The following Commissioners, staff members and others were in attendance: